“I UNDERSTAND WHY LADY JUSTICE IS WEARING A BLINDFOLD…. SHE DOESN’T WANT TO WITNESS THIS LEGAL MADNESS.”
“JUSTICE IS BLIND I’M ASSUMING IS A RESULT OF READING THE LAW AND WANTING TO STAB YOUR EYES OUT”
THIS IS NOT REFERRING TO ANY SPECIFIC LEGAL MATTER
Attorneys have devoted a significant amount of time and money to obtain their law degree. Usually a Doctor of Jurisprudence or Juris Doctor. Whatever the degree/title or “State BAR” requirements are to “practice” law are, I have a question. ———-
WHEN A LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE REJECTS THE LAW BECAUSE IT CHALLENGES THE “NORMAL SYSTEM OF CONSISTENT CONFORMITY”, IS THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM GUILTY AS WELL AS THE INDIVIDUAL ATTORNEY?
This is a complicated subject, but is one that is important. There is no doubt in my mind that there are great attorneys out there, and regardless of great resistance and being ostracized they still challenge certain issues that majority would/could not. The numbers show that it is “SYSTEMATIC” NOT TO GO TO COURT!!!!!
IF YOU ARE GUILTY, A PLEA IS A GOOD DEAL!…… IF YOU ARE INNOCENT, THE “SYSTEM” MAKES IT PUNISHABLE TO PROVE IT IN COURT.
WELL THIS IS INTERESTING
In the fiscal year of 2010-2011 (July 2010 to June 2011), the trial courts (circuit and county) in Florida disposed of 2,774,302 civil cases (not including probate, family court, or civil traffic infraction cases). Of that, only 1,049 were disposed by a jury and only 4,348 were disposed through a non-jury or bench trial. So out of all the cases disposed during the 2010-2011 fiscal year, less than 0.2% made it to trial. As for settling prior to trial, just looking at Circuit Civil alone (not including probate, family court, or civil traffic infraction cases), 9.9% of cases settle prior to other disposition and 1.2% settle through mediation. So nearly 90% of all civil cases in the state circuit courts (not including probate, family court, or civil traffic infraction cases) fail to settle or make it to trial.
I’m not a attorney, I have no “formal” legal education. That being said, I find it unacceptable if I speak with an attorney or other legal official that do not know the legal statute/code/law/amendment/terminology….. ect…. BUT STILL CLAIM TO KNOW IT AND/OR APPLY IT WRONGFULLY -THEY SHOULD JUST ADMIT WHEN THEY NEED TO RESEARCH IT OR DOUBLE CHECK IT——–
THERE IS SO MUCH COMPLEXITY BEYOND THE JUST THE “BASIC” THAT I WOULD UNDERSTAND THEM NEEDING TO CHECK!!!!!!!
IT DOESN’T MAKE THEM INCOMPETENT WHEN THEY ARE NOT SURE ABOUT SOMETHING, BUT, NEGLIGENT IF THEY PROCEED REGARDLESS
LIKE MEDICAL DOCTORS
WE TRUST THESE PROFESSIONALS WITH OUR LIFE!!!!!
ASK QUESTIONS, GET 2ND OPINIONS
Depending on the State your phone # is in and the State in the other callers # is in, legally determines the lawful recording of the conversation.
Some States have a single party consent rule,others have a two party consent rule.(IF ONE PERSON HAS A # IN A 2 PARTY CONSENT STATE, THAN IT DOES NOT MATTER IF THE OTHER # IS IN A 1 PARTY CONSENT STATE)
If you are having a phone conversation from a phone in a single party consent State with another person with a phone that is also in a single party consent State than you are not required to inform them that you are recording.
Now , If you are in conversation with someone that is on a phone that has a # registered in a 2 party consent State, and your phone is registered in a single party consent State- You can not legally record the conversation (without their consent) because of the other # is in a 2 party consent state.
My opinion on this is that if the gov is permitted to listen in on cellular phone conversations without a Warrant from a judge —- than we (the people) should also have the right to freely and legally record any conversation as well – without consent set by a “STATE” position of allowance.
I KNOW THIS WAS RANDOM THOUGHT AND NOT APPLICABLE TO MOST OF US…..
JUST ONE OF MY RANDOM RANTS…
BUT…. IF YOU FIND YOURSELF IN A POSITION TO WANT AND RECORD A PHONE CONVERSATION- MAKE SURE YOU CHECK YOUR STATE RULES AS WELL AS THE STATE RULES OF THE OTHER CALLER